Bail Applicant Under Mandatory Obligation To Disclose Criminal Antecedents, Non-Disclosure Results In Erroneous Decisions: Andhra Pradesh High Court Judicial Decrees Cannot Be Set Aside By Administrative Orders After Decades; Long-Standing Revenue Entries Must Be Protected: Allahabad High Court 'Any Use Whatsoever' Includes Promotion & Events: Bombay High Court Restrains New Indian Express Group From Hosting Commercial Events Outside Southern States Reserved Category Candidates Who Qualify On Their Own Seniority Must Be Adjusted Against Unreserved Vacancies: Calcutta High Court Decree For Possession Can Be Passed If Landlord-Tenant Relationship & Termination Are Admitted; Unregistered Lease Is Month-To-Month: Delhi High Court Prosecution Against Co-Accused Not Sustainable When Main Accused Is Discharged On Same Facts: Jharkhand High Court Admission Of Handwriting On Account Statement Is Not Admission Of Its Contents; Corroborative Evidence Necessary To Prove Claim: Gujarat High Court Omission Of Label Defects In Food Inspector's Spot Memo Fatal To Prosecution For Misbranding: Himachal Pradesh High Court RBI Must Consult State Government, Not Just Registrar, To Supersede Co-operative Bank Board; Principles Of Natural Justice Excluded Under Section 36AAA: Kerala High Court Suit Filed Before IBC Proceedings Cannot Be Dismissed Under Order VII Rule 11 CPC; Section 96 Moratorium Only Stays Pending Actions: Calcutta High Court Senior Citizens Not Technologically Savvy Cannot Be Penalized For Not Checking Case Status On Court Website: Tripura High Court Telangana High Court Quashes Case Against CM Revanth Reddy Over 2019 Election Roadshow, Cites Bar Under Section 195 CrPC Maintenance Tribunal Orders Passed Without Mandated Three-Member Coram Are A Nullity: Punjab & Haryana High Court School Register Entry Regarding Date Of Birth Lacks Probative Value Unless Source Of Information Is Proved: Madhya Pradesh High Court Sets Aside POCSO Conviction Limitation Period For Specific Performance Starts From Date Of Refusal If No Fixed Date Stipulated In Agreement: Karnataka High Court Pensionary Benefits Not ‘Pecuniary Advantage’, Cannot Be Deducted From Income For Motor Accident Compensation: Punjab & Haryana High Court Will | Disinheriting Caring Spouse In Favour Of Non-Relatives Is An ‘Unnatural Disposition’ Raising Grave Suspicion: Supreme Court Registration Does Not Automatically Validate Will If Process Is Shrouded In Suspicion; Testator's Illiteracy Increases Burden On Propounder: Supreme Court Propounder Faces Heavy Burden Of Proof When Testator Is Illiterate; Registration Does Not Cure Unexplained Suspicious Circumstances: Supreme Court

Allahabad High Court Upholds Eviction of Akbar Nagar Slum Dwellers, Ensures Right to Clean Drinking Water Takes Precedence Over Unauthorised Occupation

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


The Allahabad High Court, in a landmark decision, has upheld the eviction of slum dwellers from Akbar Nagar, balancing the rights of slum dwellers against the larger public interest of ensuring clean drinking water to the citizens of Lucknow. The bench of Justices Vivek Chaudhary and Om Prakash Shukla observed, “the right to clean drinking water for the majority cannot be compromised by the unauthorized occupation of government land.” [Para 14]

The case arose from a conflict of fundamental rights: the right of slum dwellers to adequate housing versus the right to clean drinking water under Article 21 of the Constitution. Petitioners, residents of Akbar Nagar slums, challenged the eviction orders issued by the Lucknow Development Authority (LDA) and sought rehabilitation under relevant state laws and policies. [Para 1, 4]

The slum dwellers of Akbar Nagar had occupied the banks of the Kukrail water channel, a critical source of drinking water for Lucknow. The LDA had issued eviction orders under the U.P. Urban Planning and Development Act, 1973, which were contested by the slum dwellers on various legal grounds. [Para 4, 6]

The court recognized both rights as integral to the right to life under Article 21. However, it emphasized the need to prioritize the right to clean drinking water for a larger population over the unauthorized occupation by the slum dwellers. Referring to several Supreme Court judgments, the bench underscored the importance of both rights but favored the public interest in clean water. [Para 13-18]

Decision: The court directed the state to rehabilitate the BPL residents of Akbar Nagar under the ‘Pradhan Mantri Awas Yojana’ with an initial deposit of Rs. 1,000, extending the scheme to all residents seeking relocation. It set a timeline for eviction and rehabilitation, ordering the vacating of the area by March 31, 2024. [Para 20-23]

In conclusion, the court upheld the eviction, emphasizing the fundamental right to clean drinking water while providing a humane approach to eviction through a comprehensive rehabilitation plan. [Para 24-26]

Date of Decision: March 6, 2024

Raju Sahu And Others vs State Of U.P. And Others

Latest Legal News